NEW DELHI: In an unprecedented order, the Supreme Court on Thursday ordered CBI director Ranjit Sinha to completely keep off the 2G case as it found prima facie “credible” the charges that he had attempted to help the accused in the spectrum scam, as well as delay prosecution in the Aircel-Maxis case which involves former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran. “We direct the CBI director not to interfere in the 2G-scam investigation or prosecution. He will recuse himself from the case. The investigation team constituted in the CBI to probe this case will take over the handling of the case in place of Ranjit Sinha,” the court said. A bench of Chief Justice HL Dattu and justices Madan B Lokur and AK Sikri refrained from spelling out the reasons for its extraordinary decision which rendered Sinha’s tenure as head of the investigating agency ignominious. “To protect the fair name of the CBI and to protect the reputation of the CBI director, we are not giving elaborate reasons. Suffice it for us to observe that information furnished by the applicant (CPIL) appears to be prima facie credible. So, it needs to be accepted. We reiterate that we are not giving elaborate reasons as the CBI has its own reputation and we don’t intend to tarnish it,” the bench said.

The Supreme Court of India.READ ALSO: SPP's report indicts Sinha on 3 accounts SC-appointed special public prosecutor Anand Grover, who on court orders examined the evidence on Sinha’s alleged misdeeds in the 2G-scam case, held that the evidence provided by the petitioner was credible. Grover slammed the CBI director’s conduct and, in fact, said he could even face criminal contempt for attempting to obstruct administration of justice in the 2G-scam case. The bench emphatically rejected the defence of Sinha’s counsel Vikas Singh that the CBI chief had done no wrong. “He is the head of the CBI. He should have the independence to take administrative decisions. All decisions taken were within the four corners of law and CBI manual,” Singh said. The order, just days before Sinha’s retirement, will ensure that he leaves on an embarrassing note, perhaps keeping with the trajectory of a tenure which saw the court coming down hard on him for getting the ‘Coalgate’ probe report vetted by the UPA government before submitting it to court. The episode saw the court likening the agency to a “caged parrot”. READ ALSO: Supreme Court sends back CBI top brass from court to office

The SC has been monitoring CBI’s investigation into the 2G case, and has set up a special team for the purpose. However, NGO ‘Centre for Public Interest Litigation’ (CPIL) had alleged that Sinha misused his position as chief of the investigating agency to try to dilute cases against influential accused and get the CBI to echo their defence. The CBI, at his instance, proposed to file fresh affidavits which were at odds with the original one. READ ALSO: SC raps CBI officers, asks them to leave court and 'do their duty' in office Appearing for the petitioner, activist-advocate Prashant Bhushan had alleged that Sinha tried to oust CBI DIG Santosh Rastogi from the 2G probe when he opposed attempts to sabotage the probe and prosecution. Bhushan had backed up his charge by producing the diary of Sinha’s engagements at his residence to allege that he frequently met several contacts of 2G-scam accused.

Prashant Bhushan had alleged that Ranjit Sinha tried to oust CBI DIG Santosh Rastogi from the 2G probe when he opposed attempts to sabotage the probe and prosecution. On Thursday, the bench was further peeved when Sinha’s counsel alleged that Rastogi, who was part of the court-appointed investigating team, appeared to be the “petitioner’s mole” in leaking internal information. READ ALSO: DIG Santosh Rastogi may be the 'mole' leaking documents to Bhushan, Sinha tells SCSC recalls order seeking name of whistleblower After hearing parties, the bench said there was no “substance” in the CBI director’s accusations against Rastogi. In addition, it bolstered the investigating team’s confidence by putting it in charge of the probe and prosecution of the 2G scam-related cases from now in place of Sinha. It was a particularly bad day for Sinha who had insisted that Bhushan be made to disclose the identity of the whistleblower who had provided him with the catalogue of visitors at Sinha’s residence as well as his notings on files related to the 2G case. This led the court to ask Bhushan on September 15 to reveal in sealed cover the name of the “whistleblower”. But with the special public prosecutor saying that the evidence was credible, the court accepted his request to recall the order for disclosure of the identity of the source of the information with the activist-advocate.